Tone in Climate Disclosures under CSRD/ESRS: Evidence from the Oslo Stock Exchange
CSRD/ESRSに基づく気候関連開示におけるトーン：オスロ証券取引所からのエビデンス (AI 翻訳)
Ellen Kulset, Charlotte Haugland Sundkvist, Tonny Stenheim
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
本研究は、CSRD/ESRSに基づく気候関連開示のトーン（感情）を辞書ベースのテキスト分析で調査。オスロ証券取引所上場企業の開示テキストを分析し、開示が中立ではなく、より肯定的・確実な表現が多いことを発見。ESGスコアが高い企業やスコアが低下した企業ほど肯定的な表現を使う傾向が見られた。強制的・詳細な報告要件下でも、企業が戦略的にトーンを調整する可能性を示唆。
English
This study uses dictionary-based tone analysis to examine climate disclosures under the mandatory CSRD/ESRS framework. Analyzing firms listed on the Oslo Stock Exchange, it finds that disclosures are generally not neutral: firms use more positive and certainty words. Higher ESG scores and declining ESG scores are associated with more positive language, though results vary across tests. The paper provides early evidence that even under detailed, mandatory, and assured reporting, tone remains strategic.
Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.
📝 gxceed 編集解説 — Why this matters
日本のGX文脈において
本論文はCSRD/ESRSという欧州の強制気候開示基準におけるトーン分析を行っており、日本のSSBJ基準の導入や有報における記述情報の質を検討する上で示唆に富む。日本企業が開示の客観性を担保するための参考となる。
In the global GX context
This paper offers early evidence on tone in mandatory climate disclosures under the newly implemented CSRD/ESRS. It demonstrates that even with detailed standards, assurance, and mandatory requirements, firms may use language strategically. This has global relevance as jurisdictions like Japan adopt similar disclosure frameworks (SSBJ) and consider the role of tone in investor protection and greenwashing prevention.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:Provides a methodology for analyzing tone in mandatory climate disclosures and offers early empirical evidence on CSRD/ESRS reporting, useful for scholars studying disclosure language and greenwashing.
🏢実務担当者:Corporate sustainability teams can understand how tone in mandatory disclosures may be perceived by investors and auditors, and consider implications for their own CSRD or similar reporting.
🏛政策担当者:Regulators implementing mandatory climate disclosure standards (e.g., SSBJ, ISSB) should note that firms may use positive tone strategically even under detailed rules, warranting attention to enforcement and linguistic neutrality.
📄 Abstract（原文）
This study investigates firms’ mandatory climate-related communication under the new European sustainability reporting rules, the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS). We study whether ESRS E1 disclosures on climate change have a neutral tone and whether tone is related to firms’ ESG performance.The sample consists of firms listed on the Oslo Stock Exchange, required to report under CSRD in 2024. We analyze the text of their disclosures using dictionary-based tone measures. We measure positive versus negative language, certainty versus uncertainty language and test whether tone is associated with firms’ ESG scores and with negative changes in ESG scores.The results show that the disclosures are generally not neutral in tone. On average, firms use more positive than negative words and more certainty than uncertainty words. We also find that firms with higher ESG scores and firms with declining ESG scores use more positive language than other firms. The latter result is not robust across all tests.The study contributes early evidence on the language used in climate reporting under CSRD/ESRS. It suggests that tone remains a strategic part of sustainability reporting even when disclosure requirements are detailed, mandatory, and subject to assurance.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openaire https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.6718775first seen 2026-07-09 04:43:57
🔔 こうした論文の新着を逃したくない方は キーワードアラート に登録（無料・3キーワードまで）。
gxceed は公開メタデータに基づく研究支援データセットです。要約・翻訳・解説は AI 支援で生成されています。 最終的な解釈・検証は利用者が原典資料に基づいて行うことを前提とします。